Undergraduate students often view and define terms differently than faculty and scholars. Differences in the operationalization of terms can lead to miscommunication and misunderstanding, especially within university classrooms. The present study used the theoretical framework of sensemaking to understand how undergraduate students perceived and defined inclusion in university classrooms. Through the facilitation of eight focus groups (N = 50), we identified four elements that contribute to inclusion/exclusion: "Respect," "Safety," "Unfettered Expression," and "Context Appropriate." Theoretically, these findings show a lack of concreteness in students' definition of these terms, which can lead to ambiguity and ambivalence when defining the boundaries of inclusive/exclusive spaces. The lack of specificity dilutes the power of these words and phrases, and its ability to meet its intended purpose (e.g., disruption of oppressive systems). Pedagogically, for instructors to become intentional practitioners of inclusion, we argue that instructors must have an operationalized definition of inclusion grounded in social justice frameworks, share this definition and its rationale with students, engage in instructor reflexivity, and develop proactive strategies to combat challenges to inclusion.